MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220814219 · doi:10.3390/robotics11020032

An Analysis of Power Consumption of Fluid-Driven Robotic Arms Using Isotropy Index: A Proof-of-Concept Simulation-Based Study

2022· article· en· W4220814219 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRobotics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityCogmation Robotics (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRyerson University
KeywordsKinematicsTorqueRobotPower (physics)Power consumptionIsotropyComputer scienceControl engineeringControl theory (sociology)Measure (data warehouse)Work (physics)Motion (physics)Robotic armSimulationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Mechanical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The manipulability of a robotic arm may be defined based on ease of motion in different directions or ease of applying force/torque. In this study, we use manipulability measures to investigate how the kinematics of robots can be employed to calculate the optimal power required to drive the actuation systems of their arms. We hypothesize that the isotropy measure is related to the power consumption of the robotic arm. In addition to theoretical aspects, we consider practical applications that can minimize power consumption in robotic systems. Since the method is simple to implement and has no assumption on the robot’s work environment or dependence on information on the main power supply, manipulability measures can be used as a tool to predict the power consumption of robotic manipulators.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it